Haslam at the TFA: The Real World vs. The Constitutional World
Haslam at the TFA:
The Real World vs. The Constitutional World
Knoxville mayor and Republican candidate for governor of Tennessee Bill Haslam appeared at the Nashville chapter meeting of the Tennessee Firearms Association Monday night, before a decidedly supportive crowd. Well, mostly supportive.
The message I got was: constitutional rights are for theorists. In other words, “I live in the real world, so don’t bother me with the Constitution.”
Listen to this audio http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpHvd5b3sMc
When asked to distinguish between the rights described in, say, the First Amendment, and the right described in the Second Amendment, Haslam responded that that was just the way it is. When asked under what authority the legislature acts to require state issued permits for handgun carry, he responds that’s what the legislature passed. Constitutional rights are fine in theory, he maintains, “but I live in the Real World”.
Voters looking for a principled leader are going to have to look elsewhere. Haslam, compared to McWherter, may be the lesser of two evils, but a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.
Hobson’s Choice.
Richard Hamblen's Blog 
Richard, I was there too and Haslam was trying to respond to three different peoples’ questions. When I finally asked him about the core of the matter- would he or would he not support a Vermont-style non-permit carry law, IF the new legislature brings a bill for it to his desk, his answer- on video- was yes, he would. I went in with my own concerns about Haslam’s membership in Bloomberg’s “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” group, but I think he addressed that well enough and so at this point, I disagree with you about Haslam. The FINAL proof, one way or the other, of course, will be in how he actually governs if elected. But basing one’s choice strictly upon the matter you are blogging about here does not give a fair reflection to ALL of what was said in the meeting, or the context of the statement in trying to answer three questions at once. Perhaps we just have two different perspectives on how the situation occurred? I saw it as Haslam stating, on camera, that he would support and sign a bill that recognizes law-abiding Tennesseans have a RIGHT to carry without a mandated government permit system, once the law is changed. The matter of why and how the current law got there honestly WAS a matter of politics within the PRIOR legislature, was his point he was trying to make. So I don’t see Haslam’s election as being the problem here- I see getting ENOUGH people elected to the State House and Senate who will propose and vote for a Vermont-style carry law in Tennessee, and who will see it gets past the committee process and on the floor for voting, in order to get it TO Haslam’s desk to be able to have him sign it. I don’t disagree with your passion in the matter at all; only with your take on it in this blog.
Respectfully,
Jay Travis
I didn’t hear Haslam say he’d lead the charge for the law, either.
I don’t see Haslam’s election as the problem here either, rather it is the failure of any of the legislature and the governors to observe their oath to adhere to their oath to the state constitution. Quote the declaration of rights from the Tennessee constitution to almost anyone in state office today and I wager you’ll get a blank stare. Yet this is the source of their legal authority to pass the laws and execute them. And they remain sadly ignorant.
I was at the meeting and I think Richard is dead on. Haslam hemmed and hawed, but at the end said he would sign, if the legislature passed it. That doesn’t sound like a man who believes in the Second Amendment. If Haslam truly believed the Second Amendment was an individual fundamental right he would not only stand up and state he would sign into law “constitutional carry”, but he would work with the legislature to get it done.
I’m glad Haslam made the statement, but I am discouraged it took so long for it to come out of his mouth.
Hello! Who are these people running for office? What country do they think they live in? Does Bill Haslam not uphold the Constitution of the United States? It sounds like he thinks, very pridefully, that it does not. He seems to think that it no longer has relativeness. That’s like someone saying the Bible is just stories and yet, the Bible PROOVES itself, both historically as well as scientifically, consistently. WE are a Republic with a Democratic government – we are NOT a socialist country and we have our own religion, a belief in ONE God and we have a language – ENGLISH – and we have history – a lot of it established within our Constitution so Bill, if you want to live on the Devil’s Island along with Obama and Pelosi and Reid, go ahead – I’m happy to wave you OFF the ballet, kiddo!!! I want true Americans in our government – not these political elitists who think “they know better for the people” Hey, you WORK FOR US, period, not up for debate!!!!!!!
I listened to the recording, and I didn’t “hear” what you say you heard. I’m not sure exactly what I did hear — there was a lot of nervous skirting of questions. However, you should not put words into the man’s mouth. You are saying “the message I got…” and then you write your blog. You have put quotation marks around what you say you heard, but that is not a quote from Haslam! I’m for listening more carefully. And I don’t plan to vote for Haslam for a number of reasons. I’ll go with Brandon Dodds. Still, folks who are reading this should check out the audio clip and listen. It’s a case of a wobbly evasion, maybe, but not an outright denial of rights.
My blog is my opinion after all. Haslam had every opportunity to pay homage to Constitutional guarantees, and then add “but in the current political climate”, but he didn’t. He left me with the impression that he will do what is politically expedient at the time, but not take his natural place as leader, the same as he did when he signed on to the Bloomberg deal. I mean, what was he thinking then? Does he still make decisions the same way now? It wasn’t that long ago, you know.
A lot of good people have run for Governor, but the “reality”, to use Haslam’s term, of the system is that Money Talks.
Wow, what a surprise that this wealthy mayor is cut from the same Establishment RINO cloth as Senators Alexander and Corker. VOTE JUNE GRIFFIN!
You know they all belong to the Chamber of Commerce Party. Haslam even fumbled a question, as did McWherter, on what to do to address the demise of the small farmer in Tennessee. No plan.
so, who do you suggest we vote for….
i don’t want tweedledumber OR tweedledumbest
As I said, Hobson’s choice.
Is the “real world” filled with subjects or citizens?
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
How is the unfettered ability of anyone, including criminals and the mentally ill, to walk into a store and buy a handgun related to “a well regulated militia”?
Well, if we had an actual functioning Militia, as the Tennessee Constitution calls for, and the US Constitution describes as “necessary to the security of a Free State”,( the only institution described in such a manner), the Militia, which consists, as the Supreme Court opines in US v. Miller, of “everyone physically capable of bearing arms”, would, through its well regulated character, police those kinds of problems itself. Do you not think the criminal and the insane would become apparent at a community muster of the Militia? Were there not criminals and the insane at the time the Constitution was adopted?
A clear example of why you should have top pass a constitutional qualification I order to even run for office.
In the fervor to drive those responsible from office, along with incumbents who are way overdue for a pink slip, Americans have got to be very cautious who they start
waving banners for.
This climate may be right for sending the misfits home but it is also very ripe for deception and is as inviting for nutjobs as it is for sincere stewards of country and leadership.
Because money creates influence and celebrity, anyone can get plenty of camera time
and print. In today’s “infotainment” society, many potential leaders rise to a high level of interest based on media exposure – both good and bad. This is very dangerous because most Americans read the short form when it comes to investigating
candidates. This is the way more monsters are created.
Anybody (like this Knoxville clown) who answers a constitutional question with a flipant attitude and A REMARK LIKE A 10 YEAR OLD ON A PLAYGROUND like “because”,
should be required to wear a JACKASS sticker on his forehead the entire campaign connoting his failure to respond in the reasonable best interest of his country, his party and his constituents.
Well, he gets points for honesty.
Most politicians ( and people in general ) don’t give a flying “F” about the Constitution if it doesn’t fit their view of how life should run.
Why the surprise ?
No surprise on my part. I wish more voters would concern themselves with Constitutional law and theory rather than meekly accept platitudes from the candidates. Neither candidate seemed to express too great an interest in the actual legal authority under which he would govern.
If anyone wants to share their thoughts with Bill Haslam about this you can do so at his personal address: bhaslam@aol.com
So, for whom ARE you voting?
I was at the meeting and was surprised at the types of questions asked. One would think that the Tennessee Firearm’s Association members would have asked some hard questions about constitutional gun related issues. Does that mean the members at the meet were living in the real world? Someone needs to wake them up with some orange juice and a slice of Constitution.
This blog entry is putting words into Bill Haslam’s mouth. You do a disservice to your cause when you bend the truth this way. The TN Campaign for Liberty sent me this blog entry and while I am normally supportive of that group and the Libertarian cause, perhaps I need to look to other places to find people that can not only support a political cause but also the truth.
Props to Jay Travis above who brought some rationality and sanity to the comments section.
It seems to me that the issue was stated most clearly in the questions regarding the source of the right to keep and bear arms. It is clear that Mr. Haslam does not view the right to keep and bear arms as a inalienable right but as a privilege to be granted and regulated by the state. Therefore if the legislature decides to grant the privilege, so be it. But by the same token if the legislature decides to severely restrict or abrogate the privilege, he may not like it, but that’s the way it will be. This is the real world in which Mr. Haslam operates.
I would prefer a man who understood that God alone is the source of those rights and therefore they are not subject to the whims of the ruling class or the notions of 50% plus 1 of the population.
He is right that Vermont’s hands off policy probably would not pass the Tennessee legislature. So it’s time to elect leaders who will work for that. Is Bill Haslam one of them?
In my opinion he will not get in front of this issue. He is an affable fellow and perhaps a model bureaucrat, but leadership? Not apparent yet. It will be up to the Lieutenant Governor and the new members elected to the legislature to bring the law in conformity with the Constitution.
Let’s think about the future and consequences for a moment. You know, something Mr. Hamblen should have done before he illegally manufactured machine guns. “I thought I was on good constitutional ground” didn’t cut it. Perhaps you should have asked and clarified first. To me this calls your judgement into question. Both then and now.
Now let’s think about the past… Mr. Embody. Your “helping” seems to be more self serving than help. You dance on the line and when someone acts you file suit against them. You are damaging the cause in order to line your pockets. Who’s the politician here? Your first TFA meeting no less. That shows support? Perhaps you could have been there when McWherter was there. At least your comments would have been more justifiable and not open the door for McWherter to tell his newest lies about Haslam which are additionally causing more harm than good to the 2A.
Makes me wonder if you two have had some sort of arrangement with the left all along.
Lastly, Mr. Hamblen, try not to take one thing and distort it to suit your needs. It’s very unbecoming and quite frankly, it’s the kind of thing I would expect a “politician of the establishment” to do. Or did I strike a nerve?
No doubt this post will disappear before many can read it, but I thought I’d give it a try.
I have found that Mr. Haslam will basically say what it takes to confuse the question. I have never been able to get a direct, to-the-point answer from him, and personally eperienced his willingness to not keep a committment to a speaking appointment. Not my choice for governor! Neither is McWerter!